It is my belief, Mr. Chairman, that a political economic and military alliance with the Afghan people, at their request, would be incredibly beneficial to our long-term national security interest and could be a game-changer in the region.

Now, we need to understand that as a Congress here, the Secretary of Defense has just told us, and, since World War II terms, we're on the very low end, at a time when I think the threats to our Nation are growing exponentially.

The civilian-military partnership is essential to holding and building.

I think that it would serve as a barrier to Iranian influence coming from the West.

I just want the American people to know that we've made mistakes, but we're finally getting it right.

I think that's a real world example of where 30 years of investment really paid off.

I hope, Mr. Chairman, that sometimes this year Republicans and Democrats can have a breakthrough on this issue to help our men and women fighting this war.

The threat from terrorism is just not confined to Iraq and Afghanistan.

On a scale of 1 to 10, how important is it for Iraq to end well, become stable, and not be a satellite state of Iran?

I think I would echo Secretary Panetta when he was asked a question about this, and he said we are close to being able to strategically defeat al Qaeda.

Do you agree it's in our national security interest to have a military relationship with the Afghan Government, security forces, and people post-2014?

I think it's just completely brain-dead for us even to consider this, and we're not going to let it happen.

Mr. Panetta, in your opinion, are our Nation's first responders currently equipped with the best possible pre- and post-exposure radiation therapeutics?

I believe there are those who could have...

The ultimate security is partnerships; partnerships with people in the region who, if they had the capability to marry up with their will, they would fight back against these radical elements.

Would you agree that it violates the War Crimes Act and the Detainee Treatment Act that are now U.S. law?

The Afghan and Iraqi people have paid a very heavy price fighting for their freedom.

If the Iraqis ask us to provide some troops in 2012, Secretary Gates says he thinks that would be smart.

But on behalf of the people of South Carolina and I think most members of this committee, if you are listening in Pakistan, you need to choose.

I think it would be a gross miscalculation on the Iranian part to believe that you can be involved in killing Americans and nothing comes your way.

Would you agree with me that if we had such an enduring relationship, it would be a signal to Iran that needs to be sent?

We would take the finest military in the history of mankind and gut it, is that right?

I couldn't agree with you more. I don't think, quite frankly, we are going to be able to sustain our efforts in Afghanistan until we deal with the safe havens.

Do you think it is logical for this country to assume in the future that we are not going to have to use the Army in some kind of role in the future operations in the war on terror?

A security agreement with Afghanistan that provided for a continuing relationship and some kind of joint facilities and so on for training, for counterterrorism, and so on beyond 2014 I think would be very much in our interest.